https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Category: ~Tweets

Marvellous

Some vocal bros sure seem to be constantly threatened by strong female heroes.

I honestly don’t get the Captain Marvel / Carol Danvers / Brie Larson hate thing, be it in comic books or the movies. I never have. It just always feels like it boils down to horrible resentment and fear of strong women who recognize themselves as such.

That observation was inspired by yet another article — “Comic Book Fans Reject Captain Marvel | Cosmic Book News“– with that theme. “Everyone hates the Captain Marvel because she sucks and she hates men and Marvel is ruining my childhood.” But I’ve been reading this kind of “analysis” for years, ever since (a) Carol got her new name and outfit and (b) she got her own MCU movie announced, too.

Captain Marvel movie poster brie larson
Brie Larson as the MCU’s Captain Marvel

And I find that outlets that actually echo those sentiments tend to be a click-baity toxic stew of such feelings, largely just amplifying a relatively small number of hating, if vocal, broflakes, who seemingly can’t stand the very concept of a superhero who can trade punches (or energy blasts) with the best of them, but is a girl, and almost certainly has girl cooties.

(I’ve taken to asking Google News to exclude those media outlets, since I rarely find myself in agreement with any of their other pronouncements, including, frequently, how Zack Snyder is a cinematic god.)

Is Captain Marvel (comic or movie) my bestest ever experience? No. I think the character (originally as Ms Marvel) has rung through too many changes over the years (female version of a male hero, early feminist icon, bathing suit-wearing flying brick, amnesiac victim, hyperpowered cosmic hero, alcoholic … then, finally, as Captain Marvel, fearless pilot and icon for girls).

Ms Marvel and Captain Marvel uniforms
Alex Ross does a nice, if incomplete, survey of Carol Danvers’ outfits over the years

That current iteration of the character in comics has gone through a series of writers and artists and, well, series, and attracted both fierce fans and fierce detractors, but only so-so readership. I’ve bought its various incarnations because I’ve enjoyed it, but I’ve never put it at top-of-stack as the best thing of the week.

(That the comic has gone through multiple volumes and directions and creative team is much hallooed by the character’s critics, as in the original article noted, without any consciousness of how many other characters and titles go through similar things without being condemned as a threat to All that is Right and Good (and, of course, Masculine).)

Similarly, I thought the movie was good, but not spectacular, though it did decent box office — not top-tier, but quite respectable.

mcu box office 2021-09
Pretty sure those aren’t *bad* numbers.

But I can say, “Hey, this is only good, not great” without the need to pin down a binary “best of breed” or “dirty mongrel” … perhaps because I don’t see Captain Marvel as a threat to my ego or the rest of my comic book / movie franchise experience. I can see a comic / movie starring a strong woman — one who’s not showing a whole bunch of skin, at that — and not feel like my masculinity is being threatened, let alone attacked.

Brie Larson’s Captain Marvel was supposed to be a tentpole for the next wave of Marvel movies, something that COVID-19 put into a tailspin. It’s strong but not blockbusting performance may have also led to the next installment pivoting to not being another Carol solo film, but The Marvels, which will include two other related characters: Monica Rambeau (seen getting her powers in WandaVision), who in the comics held the Captain Marvel name for a while*, and Kamala Khan (a teen who in the comics got powers and took on the moniker of Ms Marvel).

I hope that’s all setting up a whole bunch of new goodness, not a response to dudes who think Captain Marvel doesn’t fit their toxic view of womanhood.

Original Tweet

* Short history lesson: The first superhero named Captain Marvel was originally a knock-off of Superman back in the 1930s, published by Fawcett. DC ended up suing Fawcett over it, quashing the comic, and eventually buying the rights to the character. Meanwhile Marvel decided it should have a character by that name, obviously and created its own Captain Marvel, a Kree spy who “went native” and defended Earth. Carol Danvers was a character in his book, and eventually got exposed to McGuffin technology, and became the similarly-powered Ms Marvel. DC started up its Captain Marvel comic again, though usually not as part of its mainstream universe. Marvel, who couldn’t make a huge commercial go of its Captain Marvel, killed him off with cancer (great comic), but realized it needed to keep the name in use in order to defend the trademark. So Monica Rambeau got created to be called Captain Marvel, though she later changed her hero name to Photon. Various other Captains Marvel showed up in Marvel, until someone had the obvious idea a few years back of renaming Ms Marvel to Captain Marvel, putting an end to all that. Meanwhile, DC finally agreed to rename their Captain Marvel to the name he invoked to trigger his powers, Shazam. And now you know. And knowing’s half the battle.

captains marvel
Captains Marvel: Marvel’s Kree Mar-Vell; Carol Danvers; and Fawcett Comics’ Billy Batson Captain Marvel, now called Shazam.

Movie Review: “Black Widow” (2021) [no spoilers]

We went to an actual movie theater! It was fun!

Black Widow is a fine action flick and a decent (if overdue) wrap-up and send-off for Natasha Romanoff. It doesn’t pay off some of the stuff it sets up, but it’s definitely in the upper half of MCU films.

Do you want to know more?

My only thoughts on a post-election afternoon

The afternoon after the night before.

  1. I am guardedly optimistic that, despite Donald’s appalling dishonesty about and continuing shenanigans with the electoral process, Biden will eventually win.
  2. Even if so, I am deeply, deeply dismayed with the US that this election is this close. That 67 million Americans are willing to overlook (if not support) Trump’s horrible personality, his racism and sexism, his incompetence at home and abroad, his corruption, his authoritarianism, and his never-ending litany of lies … boggles my mind. 
  3. I expect my animus toward Mitch McConnell will deepen to unexpected but off-putting levels over the next few years.

Degendering a gendered language

When a collective noun is fundamentally masculine, how do you include women in it?

I know that the term “Latinx” is meant to be pronounced “La-teen-ex,” but given it doesn’t crop up much in spoken conversation around me, my brain tends to read it as “La-tinks.”

I still think it’s a cool neologism, though. The Boy has been learning Italian and Latin in college, and is being thrown a curve by the gendered nature of those languages. Just as in English we’ve been tackling gendered aspects of our own tongue, languages built around gendered nows (and then verbs and other parts of speech that have to echo them) often incorporate sexual bias and traditional expectations.

“Latinx” is an effort at a collective noun that, unlike “Latino,” doesn’t seem to exclude half the people involved.

Do you want to know more? History of the term and push-back on it from some quarters

The Projecting President

“I know you are, but what am I?”

Always remember, when Donald Trump says something negative about someone else, he is, at least 95% of the time, projecting about his own behavior.

Before the Dark Times arrive …

“Buy Oreos! They’ll be worth their weight in ammo!”

 

Waffle Fries

RIP, Jack Sheldon

As we roll credits on that distinctive “Schoolhouse Rock” voice.

Jack Sheldon, jazz musician who lent voice to many Schoolhouse Rock videos of the 1970s, has passed away, age 88.

Two of his most famous hits were “Conjunction Junction” …

… and “I’m Just a Bill” …

He actually played a role in a number of the Schoolhouse Rock videos:

– The Little Things We Do (2009) … Vocals (voice)
– Report from the North Pole (2009) … Vocals (voice)
– FatCat Blue: The Clean Rivers Song (2009) … Fat Cat Blue (voice)
– Windy and the Windmills (2009) … Vocals (voice)
– Presidential Minute (2002) … Vocals (voice)
– I’m Gonna Send Your Vote to College (2002) … Boothy (voice)
– Where the Money Goes (1995) … Dad (voice)
– The Tale of Mr. Morton (1993) … Vocals / Mr. Morton (voice)
– Busy Prepositions (1993) … Vocals (voice)
– Them Not-So-Dry Bones (1979) … Vocals (voice)
– The Energy Blues (1979) … Earth (voice)
– The Body Machine (1979) … Vocals (voice)
– Rufus Xavier Sarsaparilla (1977) … Albert Andreas Armadillo (voice)
– Mother Necessity (1976) … Vocals (voice)
– I’m Just a Bill (1976) … Bill (voice)
– Conjunction Junction (1973) … Conjunction Junction Conductor (voice)

 

Sheldon was a noteworthy trumpeter, as a number of his other IMDb credits show. He was part of Jack Webb’s stable of actors for Dragnet and Adam-12, and served nearly two decades as Merv Griffin’s music director and “sidekick”.

Thank you, Mr. Sheldon, for your talent and for the many memories you left us, especially those educational earworms.

My Books of 2019

I read a lot this year.

I don’t know that I read more or less this year than last, but the overall tally looks pretty impressive.  Here’s my tally, courtesy of GoodReads (and a lot of work of my own putting the information in).

That shows up (currently) as 100 books read; that includes 50 graphic novels, along with 42 text novels (22 of them re-reads) and 8 audiobooks (non-fiction). Notable series I dove into the first time this year: Novik’s Temeraire series (in progress) and a good chunk of Lee’s Liaden books. Also reread all of Peters’ Cadfael mysteries and Zelazy’s Amber works.

There were also 2-3 virtual longboxes worth of comic books.

On to 2020!

 

 

 

 

I, the Jury

Mitch McConnell, the jury foreman in the impeachment trial is admitting that he’s collaborating with defense counsel.

Sure, everyone sort of expected that the GOP Senate would never actually convict Trump in an impeachment trial, and that Mitch McConnell, as Republican Majority Leader in that chamber of congress would make certain it never happened.

On the other hand, it’s kind of shocking that he’d actually, publicly confess / brag that he’s in the bag for Trump.

Everything I do during this, I’m coordinating with White House Counsel. There will be no difference between the President’s position and our position as to how to handle this … in total coordination with the White House Counsel’s office and the people who represent the President ….

Can I just note how … profoundly wrong this is?

The US Constitution — you know, the thing Mitch (and other federal officials) swore an oath to uphold and defend — the Constitution dictates that the Senate serves as the place for an impeachment trial. The House indicts (with articles of impeachment), and the Senate acts as jurors (with the Chief Justice of the United States serving as judge).

Mitch McConnell, effectively the jury foreman, just proclaimed he’s coordinating with the defense counsel.

And if that oath to uphold and defend the Constitution isn’t enough, there’s an additional oath Mitch will be taking, along with every other Senator.

I solemnly swear … that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald J. Trump, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.

I don’t see how he can possibly do that, if he’s already confessing his coordination with Donald Trump’s counsel.

McConnell’s statements are emblematic of the ultimate corruption of the Republican party, whose sole purpose has become, it seems, to protect and defend the presidency of Donald Trump, regardless of what he says or does.

Given that, it’s unlikely that the impeachment trial will result in a conviction, not because there is  (or isn’t) sufficient evidence to convict, but because the GOP majority (as led by Mitch McConnell) simply are disinterested in “impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.”

Indeed, there are loud rumors that Mitch will simply push through a vote to acquit, without any witnesses being heard (this after the GOP spend the last month or two complaining about not being able to call witnesses, even as the White House forbade any of its people to respond to subpoenas to act as witnesses).

Through such tactics, they can ensure that Donald Trump won’t be convicted under the articles of impeachment. But history — assuming it is written by Americans — not be kind to their dereliction of duty, and their being forsworn of their oaths.

 

 

 

“As You Like It” (and I did)

“All the world’s a stage”

We went to the Colorado Shakespeare Festival on Sunday afternoon for our second show of the season, As You Like It. It was delightfully goofy rendition, set in an American “pastoral” rural setting, with a cast of eight (doubling and tripling roles) and original music (to Shakespeare’s words) by Sam Misner (of Misner & Smith).

Indeed, my only regret about the evening was that there was no cast soundtrack available, as the music, and performances of it, were lots of fun.

The show continues to run through 10 August, if you happen to be in the Denver / Boulder area. It’s well worth going to see it.

Do you want to know more? As You Like It – CU Presents

Faded Photographs

This is the kind of thing where you say, “Man, I wish I’d had that idea 40 years ago.”

Allow me to say, this is awesome. https://t.co/87aXjtmHV9

Representatives

If we don’t pay congressfolk enough, then only the rich will be congressfolk

Freezing congressional salaries, as inflation has slashed their income over time, while they must maintain two homes and work in one of the pricier cities in the nation, is a great way to ensure that only independently wealthy folk run for Congress.
https://t.co/GAqcTYwN2p

We already have a problem with Congress being the playground of millionaires (of both parties); freezing congressional salaries (which has a knock-on effect on the salaries of aids, too) only makes this problem worse.

Yeah, I know, everyone hates Congress. But we’re stuck with it as an institution, and the public always seems much more eager to vote out other folks’ reps than their own. Given that, is Congress likely to improve if it’s only the realm of the independently wealthy, folk who don’t need to care about what congressional salaries are?

Consider that working as a Representative or a Senator means having to maintain two households, one at the home district and one in DC. Yeah, being a congresscritter has a lot of perqs, but it also carries a lot of expense — something that “ordinary” people might not be able to swing if the salary doesn’t support it.

Congressional salaries are supposed to include a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) to keep up with inflation and avoid arguments about Congress getting raises. But congressfolk who are (a) sensitive to optics or (b) wanting to be seen as fiscal hawks, as well as (c) not dependent on those raises … they’ve have kept that from happening.

Lawmakers have voted since 2009 to block their annual pay raise, which some are now trying to change this year since the cost of living has skyrocketed since then. […] The Congressional Research Service estimated that, when adjusted for inflation, lawmaker salaries have decreased 15 percent since the last pay increase in 2009.

Again, you don’t like Congress? They serve two-year or six-year (depending on the chamber) contracts — feel free to give them their walking papers at that time if they aren’t doing the job you want them to. But choking off their pay isn’t going to make them any better — it’s just going to make them less representative.

Which, y’know, kind of defeats the purpose.

Do you want to know more?

Two notes from the Twitter comments:

  1. If Congress came with a housing stipend (adjusted for real estate inflation), that would cover much of my concern here.
  2. Alternately, if we built a Congressional Dormitory, I see sitcom gold!

Terms of Engagement

The US wants to Europe to spend more on defense … or, rather, on US weapons.

The Trump Administration wants Europe to spend more money on defense … but only if they are buying weapons from the US. Yeesh. https://t.co/Ijx53aijh7

Donald Trump has long lambasted our NATO allies for not spending more of their own money on defense, rather than letting the US do so. There’s some fairness in that, though it’s distorted by the degree to which the US has wanted to maintain bases in the NATO nations (in our own opposition to the Soviet Union, and then Russia), and the degree to which the US feels it needs to spend more money on defense than the next eight biggest spenders on the planet.

But, hey, the NATO nations have apparently been convinced that Donald might desert them if they don’t pay the US more (a model which doesn’t actually exist) or if they don’t boost their own spending (as, again to be fair, they have previously agreed to).

Except … they’re not doing it the way Donald wants.

The New York Times reported last week that Michael J. Murphy, a top official in the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, “lectured” European Union ambassadors about their attempt to launch a new program that would exclude “third parties”—including the United States—from participating in cooperative military projects unless absolutely necessary.

Murphy was so angry about the issue, the Times reports, that he left no time in the session for discussion after his remarks. A “similar but less aggressive meeting” took place at the Pentagon, where discussion was allowed.

At his meeting with the ambassadors, Murphy accused the EU of “pursuing an industrial policy under the veneer of a security policy.”

We (the US) want them to spend more … but, apparently just as important, we want to profit from that spending. If they decide to boost their own military industry through defense spending (like we do in the US), well … that’s just … not … fair.

So, let’s summarize the messages that the Trump Administration is sending here to our European allies:

  1. The US is spending more on defending our European allies than we think they are worth.
  2. The US wants to make a lot more money off of our European allies.

I’m sure I read all about just that kind of tactic in How to Win Friends and Influence People.

Back to the Bad Old Days

The Supreme Court is returning to its classic role of protector of the status quo and its power interests.

For over half a century, SCOTUS has been a key in enabling social change and promoting justice for the weak. Prior to that, it was more often a protector of the status quo and powerful, a conservative opponent to progress. We’re headed that way again.
https://t.co/yxVs5dqHmS

Since, oh, the days of the Warren court, the Supreme Court has, imperfectly and to very broadly generalize, found ways that the words and principles of the Constitution protected those who needed protection. Brown vs. Board of Ed, Roe v. Wade,  Gideon v. Wainwright, Engel v. Vitale, New York Times v. Sullivan, Miranda v. Arizona, Loving v. Virginia, Texas v. Johnson, Lawrence v. Texas, United States v. Nixon,  Obergefell v. Hodges … the Court has found profound ways the Constitution protects individual freedom and equality under the law.

What most people today don’t realize is that, for much of its existence, the Supreme Court usually served as a conservative force for the status quo, protecting majorities and power structures and the establishment. This was not a matter of “activism” vs. “non-activism” (if the meaning and bounds of the Constitution were obvious and inarguable, then we wouldn’t need a Supreme Court, or we would need a court of one justice). It was the culture of what was expected of the Court, and resulted in everything from Dred Scott v Sanford to Plessy v. Ferguson to Korematsu v. United States.

Since the 1980s, conservatives in the US have been playing a long game to roll back the clock to those Bad Old Days. The nomination and (usual) confirmation of more ideologically reliable justices was part of that, and the strategy culminated in Mitch McConnell asserting a brand-new (and admittedly disingenuous) tradition of Never Letting a President Appoint a New Justice [When It’s Not One Of Our Presidents] to deny Obama a replacement on the Court.

The point of the article (link repeated below) is that the result is likely to be not only a return to a Supreme Court that protects the powerful interests within the US and majority sentiments over minority rights, but one that will eagerly roll back the last 60-70 years of precedent (stare decisis be damned). Those who find protections of free speech, of minority rights, to be of value, will need to consider how to protect them against a conservative majority that wants to turn the judicial clock back to the 1940s, if not the 1840s.

Do you want to know more? We need to prepare for a complete reversal of the role the Supreme Court plays in our lives – The Washington Post

Bang! Zoom! Straight to the Moon!

Donald is a bold, inspiration leader … in whatever direction Fox is talking about today.

Oh, look. President Random-Neuron-Firing is making arbitrary and inconsistent policy statements on Twitter. Again. I offer a shiny nickel to the first person who can identify the Fox News, etc., item that triggered him. #nasa #moon #trumptantrum https://t.co/AwbZH9gt9m

After months of proudly proclaiming that NASA was going to put us back on the Moon, for long-term occupation and exploration (said statements then faithfully echoed by NASA itself, as well as by VP Pence and other administration members), all of a sudden, Trump blurted this out yesterday:

Why the sudden change of heart? As far as anyone can tell, because an hour earlier, His Closest Advisors (Fox) said that the Moon was for chumps (and a bright, shiny nickel has been delivered to Stan for spotting this).

We literally have a president whose mood and policies on any given day are influenced by Fox News and Fox Business News. No matter what he’s said, even assuming he remembers it, a critique on Fox is enough to get him to pivot in another direction.

That would be annoying enough if we were just employees of his company (yes, I’ve worked for bosses like that). But as President of the United States? Yeesh.

Names and Places

Very cool map of the US with the most-searched-for-on-Wikipedia person name associated with each city (born, grew up, etc.) shown.
https://t.co/ymE7wbimdw

What name in Wikipedia associated with your town is the most popular search topic there? Fun stuff.

The Art of the Deal-Breaking

Trump is an unreliable advisor, because he’s an unreliable person.

How can the Brits possibly trust a potential future deal with the guy who says he’d walk away from any deal he didn’t like? https://t.co/Egf0IEfj9W

Trump advises the Brits to ditch the EU without a deal, but then suggests he has a great deal for them.

Why would anyone trust someone who suggests that deals can and should be broken if you don’t like them to make a deal with you that you can count on?

Breakfast of Champions!

Pizza is a better morning meal than a bowl of cereal, says at least one nutritionist.

Pizza! Breakfast of Champions! https://t.co/iovqMJqNnC #health #pizza

Sure, it has more fat than a bowl of cereal (even with whole milk). But it has a lot fewer carbs, less sugar (no mid-morning crash), more protein (feels more filling), and is a wash as to calories.

Just … heat it to a decent temperature, please. We’re not barbarians.

May Game Day!

Got to play lots of game I’d not done before, which is always fun

We had a fine Game Day yesterday, simultaneously celebrating May and the return of the Boy for the summer break.

Best new discovery for me was Pandemic: Reign of Cthulhu, which wedges the cooperative Pandemic rules into scurrying about various Massachusetts towns (Arkham, Dunswich, etc.) trying to stamp out cultists, drive off Shoggoths, and close portals to the elder gods, even as those damned cultists and Shoggoths keep waking the Old Ones up and slowly driving you mad.

Pandemic Cthulhu

I’ve never been a huge Pandemic fan, but for some reason the ruleset worked much better for me with different set dressing. Even though we lost at the last moment.

Another game played in the next room was Stuffed Fables, which looked like great fun — sort of D&D with stuffed animals on preset maps, telling a story. Hope to play it myself next time.

Stuffed Fables

Potion Explosion was another fun one — it’s been here before, but I’d never managed to play it. Simple enough mechanics to make it enjoyable, even with enough strategizing needed to make it interesting, combined with randomizing elements and marbles.

Potion Explosion

Last one I got in on was Azul, which on one level is just sort of a filling-in-patterns, but is gorgeous and tactile and relatively simple and interesting and fun.

Azul

A couple of other games I didn’t get in on included a birthday-requested round of Settlers of Catan, and some folk in the other room having at 5-Minute Marvel and 10 Minutes to Kill; the latter got unenthusiastic-enough reviews that matched my previous play time with it that it may end up going to the donation bin (fun concept and cool art, but just not quite all that in game play).

Good times. Onwards toward Game Day in June!

Everyone found a place to fit in on Game Day